There is something missing in the campaign for an independent Scotland which gives it a hollow centre.

That is a groundswell of support from Scottish people.

There are, of course, those who are passionately in favour of an independent Scotland. There are also those who have come to that position more recently believing that it offers a shortcut to socialism.

But for many people it is a marginal decision which could go either way.

Two years ago when notice of an independence referendum was given there was a sense of excitement in the labour movement about what a different Scotland could look like.

The question on everyone's lips was: If we want to create a better Scotland do we need independence? Could it be done with more powers for the Parliament or do the powers already exist if only they were put to use?"

Neither campaign has so far built on that initial enthusiasm for ideas. The radical left of the Yes campaign has tried to keep alive a spark saying that another Scotland is possible once the referendum is won, but the white paper has doused that with tepid water.

The No campaign's "project fear" has curbed discussion on how devolution can be used to better effect. The Labour Party's devolution commission is on hold until next spring, and its United with Labour has produced very little, leaving the campaign in the dead hand of Better Together.

The Red Paper has argued all along that constitutional questions have to be measured against their potential to:

n Challenge the power of capitalism by enabling democratic control of the economy

n Introduce a variety of forms of public ownership

n Build a sustainable and secure economy

n Redistribute wealth.

We will judge the Scottish government's white paper Scotland's Future against those criteria.

Members of the Red Paper collective believe that enhanced devolution within a federal arrangement has the potential for a more radical change than the independence envisaged in this month's white paper or, in reality, the one that is likely to come into being after a yes vote.

We would welcome the opportunity to scrutinise other proposals for the future, including Scottish Labour's devolution commission report once it become available.

The paper outlines a choice of two futures when it comes to the economy. It is claimed that if we vote no, "decisions about Scotland would remain in the hands of others."

But that's precisely what will happen if we vote yes. In terms of economic control it's a false choice, as either the Bank of England or the European Central Bank will control monetary and fiscal policy.

Its assumptions about oil are based on unrealistic forecasts and it fails to acknowledge that much of the Scottish economy is owned outside Scotland.

There is a mismatch between the large number of spending commitments within the document and its plans for taxation, which have at their core a cut in corporation tax.

It fails to include decisive commitments to sustainability and, disappointingly, it does not see a role for public ownership beyond the return of Royal Mail to the public sector and nor does it intend to explore different types of mutal and co-operative ownership.

It is committed to the EU and with it the neoliberal policies that will constrain its options.

Much of the fanfare at the launch was around the proposals for childcare and how this would enable more women to be active in the workforce. This could happen under devolution, but the concern is that tax revenues would go to Westminster.

Throughout the white paper trade unions are treated to warm words while on the other hand business gets firm commitments. The proposals, based as they are on a nationalist approach, seek to incorporate the trade unions into a partnership model.

Local government is ignored in the substantive text, but in the Q&A section it was noted that it is an important part of local democracy. It was omitted from the very sections where subsidiarity should have an important role such as local economies.

On welfare, along with childcare much was made of the commitment to end the bedroom tax. This will however have to wait until 2016 at the earliest.

Meanwhile the SNP in power is failing to support to individuals, families and housing associations that are under pressure now.

When it comes to Nato, Trident and independence, the ability to vote away Trident is a very appealing prospect. The white paper does however make it clear that it has a firm commitment to Nato and these two positions may end up in conflict. A nuclear-free Scotland counts for little when it is part of a nuclear-armed alliance.

The Red Paper collective wants a Scotland that is more equal and democratic. We want a Scotland in which there is economic democracy that gives people a say over their lives and employment and in which the Scottish Parliament has powers to own and develop our utilities and strategic industries.

We want relations with the other nations of Britain that are based on equity and fairness and a recognition of the duty to share in face of social need - and where ordinary people have the collective strength to address the concentrated power of wealth and privilege.

The Red Paper collective therefore calls for a radical federalism in which national parliaments have the powers long called for by the Scottish Trade Union Congress and the Scottish left.

Pauline Bryan is a member of the Red Paper collective. Its full response to the White Paper: Scotland's Future can be found on its website at www.redpaper.net.